Chapter 11

America and the Americas

Latin America

In the late 1700’s historic events were taking place in Latin America because of events in Europe. After Napoleon conquered Western Europe (Spain included) he placed his brother Joseph on the throne of Spain. The Spanish people abhorred Napoleon and started a long gruesome guerrilla war against the French; plus, in Latin America the Spanish colonies likewise rejected French tyranny. Simon Bolivar (1783 to 1830), a Creole (colonist of Spanish descent), rose up against the French. His army won battle after battle against forces loyal to the Spanish throne, even though it was occupied by a Frenchman. He and other freedom fighters such as Jose San Martin (1778 to 1850), set an entire continent free. From the tip of Tierra del Fuego to Mexico, Spanish and Portuguese rule was ripped away allowing the formation of free and independent states.

Looking back on what Simon Bolivar accomplished it seems a miracle. In spite of his numerous victories Simon Bolivar’s name is not a household word, and yet he was as accomplished as George Washington in setting men free. Of course, that is the best thing about General Bolivar; he conquered to spread freedom.

President James Monroe announced the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, warning Europe that the United States would not tolerate interference in Latin American affairs. The United States could not enforce this doctrine, but England could because she controlled the seas, and the doctrine fit with her policies since Britain wanted European powers to stay away from South America. Because of the American doctrine and its enforcement by Great Britain, Latin America was able to develop without unnecessary interference from Europe.

United States of America

In 1791, Congress established the first Bank of the United States (a central bank), and stockbrokers began meeting under a tree on Wall Street in 1792. The brilliant Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton was cleaning up the financial mess the United States had gotten itself into, and George Washington was unanimously elected to a second term as president. George Washington quit after his second term saying two terms was enough, and this precedent held until Franklin Roosevelt won election four times after declining to adhere to President Washington’s example. Now the US Constitution limits the president to two terms.

Figure 34 Westward American Expansion—Early 1800

After winning the war for independence and the battle for the adoption of a new Constitution America set out to move west. Moving very far west was going to be a problem because France claimed the Louisiana Territory which was the drainage basin of the Mississippi River. This would effectively block westward expansion unless the United States was willing to fight for the area. This time America was lucky. France wanted to get rid of its American holdings and offered Louisiana to the Jefferson administration at a low price.[119] The third US president had a problem. The Constitution failed to say whether or not the president’s powers included making such a deal. Jefferson believed in limiting federal (central government) power, by confining it to powers that were specifically named, but went ahead with the Louisiana Purchase in April of 1803 anyway because it was good for the country. Jefferson had no idea how good it would be for the nation. His use of an unstated power did expand the power of the president, but his decision was one of the most important ever made for the country. No one knew the size of the land area purchased so the government set out to find out. The Lewis and Clark expedition was sent to discover what the Federal Government bought. It turned out the acquisition more than doubled the size of the United States.

George Washington, in his farewell address as president, told America to stay away from foreign entanglements. Good advice, but in spite of its best efforts the United States was drawn into international affairs because of its widespread trading with Europe and the Caribbean. The small US Navy successfully fought the Barbary Coast pirates off North Africa after the US refused tribute to them in 1805; however, about the same time Britain was seizing sailors and US merchant ships during yet another war the United Kingdom was conducting against Napoleon. The United States became angry when the British ignored several warnings to cease. Talk of war increased the distress of New England area traders who realized their international trade connections might be cut by the United Kingdom in a war. Words soon turned to bullets as the United States declared war on England in 1812. As their ports fell under a blockade, New England merchants began talking about leaving the Union. The key reason for the war? The USA did not like the bully Great Britain pushing it around. The Americans were a feisty bunch.

The War of 1812

Wars of pride often go badly, and the War of 1812 went badly for the small USA against the mighty British Empire. The British seized Detroit at the outset of hostilities and repelled an American attack on Canada. As the war went on, Captain Oliver Perry won control of the Great Lakes for the United States in a stunning fresh-water naval victory over the British. The British landed and defeated an American militia force guarding Washington DC in the Battle of Bladensburg on August 24, 1814, then marched to andburned Washington DC. The British next advanced on Maryland and planned to seize the city of Baltimore. Fort McHenry was the main barrier standing between the British and Baltimore. The British bombarded the fort all night in an attempt to breach its defenses, but the fort held so the British advance came to an end. During the action at Fort McHenry the United States of America gained the words to its national anthem. Francis Scott Key, held on a British ship in the harbor as the bombardment took place, wrote the “Star Spangled Banner” as he anxiously awaited the battle’s outcome. (He wrote the words that were later set to music.)

In the West, the British encouraged Native Americans to attack the advancing American colonists, making alliances with them during the war against the United States. In fighting along the western frontier and northern frontier with Canada the Americans faced combined British and Native American units in many hard-fought actions. The Native Americans and British allies often got the best of the Americans in these battles; however, the Native American chief Tecumseh caught a bullet in the Battle of the Thames and died on October 5, 1813. Tecumseh’s death effectively ended Native American support for the British and eased the pressure on the Americans. The British conquered a portion of Maine, but this was relinquished back to the US in the treaty ending the war.

At sea, the British maintained a blockade of the American coast severely hurting trade, nonetheless, in several single-ship duels on the high seas American frigates defeated larger British ships. Perhaps the best known was the USS. Constitution’s [120] victory over the larger and better armed HMS Guerriere. Even though the Americans won several single-ship battles, the British blockade was effective and significantly impaired US commerce.[121]

The last battle of the war took place when the British assaulted the city of New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi River on January 8, 1815. Unfortunately, the war was already over when the battle took place, but the forces were unaware of this fact because word of the treaty’s signing was slow to reach the British or American armies. The British forces drew up on a flat area near the town and launched an all-out attack but General Andrew Jackson had expertly fortified the area the British had to assault. The battle was fierce, nevertheless, well-protected defenders shot down the British as they attacked across open ground. Over two thousand English troops were lost to approximately one hundred Americans killed in the action. Word of this unnecessary victory reached Washington DC about the same time as the news of the signing of the treaty. The result was a huge celebration and the illusion of a war won against the British.

The Treaty of Ghent, signed on December 24, 1814, ended the war. Not much was gained by either side. The impressments issue went away because the English stopped impressments after the war with Napoleon ended. England gave back the portion of Maine they conquered. The one real gain was on the frontier where the American settlers would no longer face Native Americans allied with and supported by the British. After several defeats and the near secession of New England from the Union over trade issues, perhaps the American leadership learned a lesson. This was the last war between the United States and the United Kingdom.

American Growth and Problems

By 1815, the population of the United States and its western areas (not actually a part of the nation) was about 10 million. In Europe (including western Russia), the population was over 200 million. In India, the population was estimated at 190 million, and in China about 320 million. Japan stood at approximately 20 million. Thus, the United States enjoyed a small population compared to the industrialized nations of Europe, the colony of India, or the Far East. In trade, however, America was doing very well. The American method of manufacture was starting to spread throughout the United States. In this method machines produced parts so well that no additional human handiwork was necessary before assembly. In one showing of how this worked, an American firearms manufacturer put new parts from several rifles right off the machining process into a box and shook it. After he shook them up, he took them out and assembled the rifles that functioned properly without any additional work. In Europe the manufactures were still using gunsmiths for the final assembly because the parts did not come out of the machines ready to install. Tweaking was required before the parts would fit. Thus, each rifle ended up as a semi-custom gun with the parts individually fitted. Such innovative techniques made American goods cheaper and the parts were easier to replace.

As time advanced, things were not all sweetness and light in the new republic of the United States of America. In 1838, Joshua Giddings from Ohio became the first representative elected to Congress on a platform of ending slavery (abolitionist). As the abolitionist made progress in Congress the southerners began to worry about their economic future. In 1841, the first wagon train arrived in California implying that many new territories east of California were ripe for admission to the Union. The year 1845 brought the Irish potato famine to Ireland, and many Irish families immigrated to the New World to escape starvation in the old. The immigrants came to the great manufacturing centers rising in the northeastern areas, adding significantly to their population. This combination of a growing population in the north plus new territories wanting admission to the Union spelled big trouble for the slave-owning south. Nevertheless, it was about to get much worse because of a brilliant American success in a war with its Spanish speaking neighbor.

Mexican-American War

1846 to 1848

1846 brought another war. It all started with Texas revolting and separating from Mexico in 1836. A small army of Texans led by Sam Huston defeated a large invading Mexican army under General Santa Anna.[122] Texas then applied to join the United States, and the application was accepted which admitted Texas as a territory in 1845. The United States attempted to purchase Texas and other areas of the southwest, including California, but the Mexican government was in no mood to bargain. Mexico warned that accepting Texas into the Union would mean war. Mexico also claimed the territorial boundary between itself and Texas was150 miles north of the Rio Grande River. Texas and the United States said the boundary was the Rio Grande. After the annexation of Texas, Mexico sent troops to enforce its boundary line; hence, the United States sent troops to establish the Rio Grande as the boundary and to protect Texas. After a small clash between the two armies, Congress declared war on Mexico on May 13, 1846. The US president, James K. Polk, was a driven personality wanting to acquire territories claimed by Mexico. Polk was preparing for, and fomenting, the Mexican conflict to achieve his purpose. Polk was a one term president, but his impact on American history is considerable.

Polk wanted Mexico to relinquish claims to the southwest and California, but so far the Mexicans refused to bargain. Early fighting in California and New Mexico was indecisive, so President Polk decided to invade Mexico by sea. General Scott would land at Vera Cruz, defeat the Mexican forces there, and then move to attack Mexico City if necessary. Under the leadership of General Zachary Taylor (a future president), a small US blocking expedition moved to northern Mexico. General Santa Ana, in charge of the Mexican forces, knew an American sea expedition under General Scott was on its way to Vera Cruz. The Mexican general moved north planning to defeat Taylor’s small force first then hurry south and defeat Scott. This was a good plan, but Santa Anna’s troops executed it poorly. Taylor advanced into Northern Mexico and occupied a defending position in the mountain pass of Buena Vista when General Santa Ana, with an army of about 15,000 men, assaulted the Americans on February 22, 1847. The Americans held, although only after a timely artillery bombardment by Captain Braxton Bragg and a desperate charge by Mississippi riflemen, led by Jefferson Davis, drove off the nearly victorious Mexicans. That was about it for the northern Mexico campaign. Santa Ana broke contact to hurry south as Scott’s force of 8,500 men was landing at Vera Cruz.

Figure 35 The Mexican American War

General Winfield Scott conducted a brilliant campaign, defeating the larger Mexican Army and capturing Mexico City. The march on Mexico City took place after an amphibious landing at the city of Vera Cruz. This was the first amphibious landing in US history. After a twelve-day siege the coastal city fell. Scott then marched toward the Mexican capitol. In all, Scott would win seven battles on his way to Mexico City. In one of the larger confrontations General Santa Ana, with over 12,000 men, entrenched in a good defensive location near the town of Cerro Gordo and attempted an ambush; however, poor discipline among Mexican troops gave away their positions. Even so, the Mexican positions were formidable. Scott skillfully flanked General Santa Ana thus defeating Mexico’s forces. The Mexican Army fell back on Mexico City and the protection of its bastion at Chapultepec. A determined assault by US Army and US Marine forces captured the protective citadel and Mexico City fell immediately thereafter. In US Marine tradition, the Corps captures Chapultepec after the US Army failed in two assaults. The Marines discovered and stormed a lightly guarded gate, captured the fort, and then advanced to Mexico City ahead of the US Army. Thus, the US Marine Corps hymn contains the following words, “From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli . . .”[123]

The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo ended the war in 1848 and ceded the southwest and California to the United States for a payment of 15 million dollars and the assumption of over 3 million in claims. The extensive territorial gain led to the controversy overextending slavery to the newterritories, and then the US Civil War. At least a few commentators say if the Mexican-American War never occurred avoiding the Civil War would have been much easier. Some of the lower-ranking American officers who contributed to this campaign became well known later: Robert E. Lee, US Grant, Stonewall Jackson (not known as Stonewall then), and George Meade were just a few.

In 1853, the United States finished out its southwest boundaries with the Gadsden Purchase of the Gila River Valley from Mexico. Americans rejoiced over the victories of the war with Mexico, but the next American war would spill only American blood on American land.

The American Civil War 1861 to 1865

(The First Modern War)

This may be the saddest time in the history of the United States of America. The emotions stirred by the Civil War remain with America today. It was the bloodiest and hardest war the nation ever fought. All the dead were Americans, and every bit of land and property devastated was American.

Before Vietnam, many said America never lost a war. This is not true. The Confederate States of America (CSA) fielded an American army, and they fought for their view of freedom with a fury and determination seldom seen in the history of the world. Nevertheless, the South lost; therefore, the first war lost by Americans was the Confederate States of America in the Civil War.[124] Southerners always contended they were fighting another American Revolution, claiming they only wanted the powerful North to leave them alone. The North astutely claimed it was fighting a continuation of the American Revolution, saying they were fighting to set men free from slavery and oppression. Either way, the problems of the United States came down to a clash of arms. Legislation and compromise failed, only death and destruction would answer the issue.

Figure 36 American Civil War

Black—Union State (no slavery)

Light Grey—Deep South, Left Union Before 4/15/1861

Dark Grey—States that left Union soon after 4/15/1861

White—Union States Permitting Slavery

Causes

The causes of the Civil War are legion. Most try to boil it down to slavery, but that generalization avoids a lot of history and a lot of thinking. By 1860, there were deep cultural, economic, and political differences between the North and the South. Fundamentally, the North was a highly urbanized industrial manufacturing powerhouse, and the South was a rural patriarchal agricultural region. Trade, for example, became a considerable unresolved issue between the industrial North and the agricultural South. The North wanted tariffs to protect its industries, but the South wanted zero tariffs so it could sell its cash crops of cotton and tobacco to Europe without facing retaliatory foreign tariffs.[125] The South actually exported much more, in terms of monetary value, than the North; thus, any tariff would harm the South greatly even while it protected the North’s industries. Because the economic interests of the North and South were so divergent, continuing clashes were predestined over a wide range of economic and social issues. In fact, these two regions are still clashing over economic and social issues.

Perhaps the greatest divide between the North and South was cultural. The North was an urban society attracting the wealthy, inventive, and liberal social thinkers of the era. In urban societies social movement, from poor to middle class or uneducated to educated, was common and somewhat easily done. There was far more opportunity for advancement on merit in metropolitan areas where race, class, ethnicity, and the like did not totally determine one’s place in the world. The South’s rural society determined status by birth, and change over the course of one’s lifetime was unlikely. Landowners controlled the wealth, with a few exceptions, and the middle class was small. This was a stratified rural society, much like the society of the Dark Ages, divided chiefly into the wealthy and the poor.[126] The South was populated mostly by poor white farmers who were either sharecroppers or held small farms on poor ground. The rich folk’s families had arrived first, acquiring the best land and building large plantations. These extraordinarily wealthy landowners became the slaveholders. Owing to their menial economic situation, Southern hardscrabble farmers could not own slaves. Thus, the solid majority of southerners were NOT slave owners.

The stratified society of the South broke along more than racial lines. Whites were not to mix with blacks; the poor did not mix with the rich; the educated avoided the uneducated; men and women were highly regulated in their conduct with one another, and one always held their “place.” This kind of separation is common in agricultural societies because large landowners are set apart from common soil tillers by a large economic gap. The dirt poor vastly outnumbered the superbly rich; thus, keeping the poor in their place, both black and white, was critical for elite landowners.

These two societies, Northern urban and Southern rural, could not live in harmony unless they left one another alone. If each side ran separate societies, without the federal overlap, peace might prevail. For example, the South could have abolished tariffs while the North kept them; however, the nature of federalism demanded one must destroy the other unless each ignored the other. But interference happened. The radicals of the North roared that slavery, this outrage to humanity, deserved destruction no matter what the cost. As the furor of the language increased, trust decreased. The South distrusted the North on regional issues. If the North gained control of the Senate, by even one vote, they would use it to pass legislation harming southern regional interests, including the abolition of slavery and raising tariffs.

Because the landed elites ran the South (as usual—money talks), slavery was a major factor in every regional dispute in Congress. The northern states banned slavery by 1860. There was a virtual tie in the Senate between slave states and free states, and the South recognized maintaining the balance as new states came into the Union was vital, otherwise, they could not protect their regional interests. The Mexican-American War and the following land acquisitions made the problem acute. The timing and method of allowing states into the Union created a “perfect storm” where compromise broke down.

Another problem was the emotional nature of the slavery issue. Southerners wanted the North to go away and leave them alone. Why should northerners be able to order them around? Why were the northerners so adamant about ending an institution not in their area and causing them no harm? Northern propaganda concerning mistreatment of slaves galled the South. Why would slave owners mistreat their property? Would they mistreat their horses? Northerners must know slaves were valuable, and mistreatment caused their value to decrease. The southerners believed that just because families might endure separation at slave sales or some slaves required physical punishment to keep them in line was no cause for concern on behalf of those not owing slaves. In the North, abolitionists were crying out for justice. In newspapers and speeches across the North, the abolitionists’ cause drew ever more attention to ending slavery.[127]

Southerners argued northerners should pay slave owners to set the slaves free. Emancipation by purchase was a practical idea, but the abolitionists refused to pay because they thought the institution was ungodly, cruel, and immoral. And there was another rub; the Constitution, as we have discussed, told the government to pay for property it took and southerners said slaves were property. The southerners thought the Constitution was clear—the North must pay for any slaves it forced them to free. The abolitionist also thought morality was clear—no man had the callous right to own another. Because the two societies existed side by side, and the one would not leave the other alone, the problems failed to subside.

The ultimate problem: the Constitution stood silent on a state departing the Union. Many in the South thought, as a legal matter, that if a state could vote to join the Union it could vote to leave the Union. In the North many feared a Union split up would significantly impair the nation and argued no state could leave without the consent of Congress. As southern congressional power declined, they considered the ultimate solution: leave the Union.

The stage was set for an armed conflict to decide if a state had the right to leave the Union. This was the true issue of the war. Slavery along with vast cultural, economic, and emotional issues may have caused secession; however, none of that was directly at issue. The one issue to be decided as the war began was whether a state could separate from the Union without Congressional approval. Abraham Lincoln refused to debate the issue. After the South seceded, he called up the troops and immediately moved to force the secessionists’ states back into the Union. Blood spilling over countless battlefields would now answer the political question.

The Republican Party, founded in 1854, was a reaction to the Kansas-Nebraska Act expanding slavery to the new territories. The new party opposed any expansion of slavery to the territories; however, many thought it also stood for abolishing slavery, but this was not an immediate goal. In 1860 its candidate for president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, won the election because he received the most electoral votes. The fact that the southern vote was split actually gave the Republicans the white house. Worst of all, the vote was split along northern and southern lines. The election displayed the extent of the national split. Even though Lincoln was not going to abolish slavery, he would stop its expansion to the territories. The South knew they would soon be a minority in the Senate. Lincoln’s election triggered the immediate secession of seven Deep South states followed later by the relatively moderate Border States. As Lincoln entered office the secession was underway. From his first moments as president he faced the crisis of the Civil War.

The time line to war:

Dec 20, 1860: South Carolina secedes

Jan 1861: Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, and Florida secede; Texas secedes Feb 1, 1861

Feb 4: The seven seceding states meet in Montgomery, Alabama to draft a Confederate Constitution

March 4: Lincoln’s inaugural address. Lincoln states he will not end slavery in states where it already existed; however, seven (7) states had by now seceded from the Union. The ones that will later secede (Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas) would be some of the most powerful in the Confederacy, but they were still with the Union after Lincoln spoke. Some would, in fact, vote to stay prior to April 15.

April 12: Ft Sumter shelled (April 14, surrenders).

April 15: Lincoln calls up 75,000 troops—each state to contribute troops. This move outrages Virginia and the other southern states still with the Union.

Apr 17: Virginia secedes (8th state) on a vote of 88 to 55. Prior to the assault on Ft Sumter, secession was voted down 89 to 45 (April 4). Virginia was the key state.

May 6: Arkansas secedes.

May 7: Tennessee secedes.

May 20: North Carolina secedes.

Border States: Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware do not secede. This was crucial to an eventual Union victory. In1863, W. Virginia was made a Union state by splitting it away from Virginia.

It is arguable that the Southern States seceding after April 15 left for reasons other than slavery. In their Declarations of Disunion, some say oppression by the Federal Government caused the disunion. Historians ignore these declarations since it is felt they covered up the real cause of secession (slavery); yet, at that moment there was no reason to cover up anything. In fact, Virginia’s secession motion was soundly defeated in their legislature just prior to Lincoln calling for troops. Virginia left after the call for troops saying they feared Federal oppression. It seems they were telling the truth about their reasons for secession.

Why rush to call up troops when the South harbored no intentions of invading the North? It appears Lincoln hurried into the war. Some Northerners thought that mustering the troops for action alone would end the rebellion. Others thought winning a battle or two might be necessary; nevertheless, they believed a short war was certain. Therefore, most northerners thought calling up the troops was necessary and good at this point. Both Sherman and Grant (famous generals for the North) knew the war would be difficult and long, as did Winfield Scott, the Union’s commanding general in 1861. One would hope Lincoln knew the South would fight relentlessly, but why move so quickly to build a Union army and prod it into action? Lincoln must have thought as other northerners did, that the South could be quickly defeated.

Why fight for Fort Sumter when its strategic value was minimal and resupplying it could be very difficult? The reasons for trying to resupply Fort Sumter were probably political. If the South fired the first shots of the conflict they would take on the role of the aggressor. Southern aggression would rally the North to support the war and might keep the South from gaining overseas support.

Lincoln asked each state to provide men for the war against the secessionist states; however, such a move would infuriate Virginia as well as other slave holding states. This action would surely result in Virginia, and others, joining the rebellion thereby increasingthe combat and economicpower of the Confederacy exponentially. Almost any move keeping Virginia and other non-secessionist states in the Union was better than driving them out. Why not negotiate with the individual secessionist states in a bid to split a few off and weaken the remainder? The defection of any of the original seven states would cripple the ability of the rest to survive. If political moves could mortally wound the session why not try them? How to lure at least one back? Find a state whose leadership was interested in projects that might buy them off, such as: bringing the transcontinental railroad through their state, building harbor facilities, new roads, or perhaps guarantees on the tariff issue.[128] Lincoln decided to call on the military right away and either ignored the certain results of the move or thought the remaining slave holding states would stay with the Union. However, Virginia had sent unequivocal warnings about the results of using military force against the secession. Lincoln could not have missed those danger signs. Going ahead in the firm knowledge that Virginia, along with other powerful slave holding states, would join the Confederacy was pure insanity. Nonetheless, that was the president’s action. Lincoln’s claim to greatness comes from his absolute determination to save the Union; however, this inability to handle the secession with anything other than immediate war reflects badly upon him. His moves immediately before and after the inauguration in response to the secession crisis were abysmal.

Casualties

The American Civil War cost the North about six hundred thousand casualties (about 360,000 dead) and the South about four hundred thousand casualties (about 258,000 dead) out of a population of perhaps 32 million for the entire nation (all these are estimates). This puts the military casualty total at about 1 million out of 30 million; thus, a 3 percent casualty rate.[129] The total number of men who were under arms was over 2.2 million in the North and just over 1 million in the South; thus, over 3 million men were under arms, which was 10 percent of the population at the time. Most nations in critical wars manage to field about 10 to 20 percent of their population, and thereafter, they are scrapping the bottom of the manpower[130] barrel. This was the bloodiest war in US history as of 2010 because all the dead and wounded were American.

Strategy—the North

General Winfield Scott designed the North’s war strategy. Scott’s plan was to established a naval blockade and then split the South into sectors which could be defeated one by one if necessary. The first thrust went down the Mississippi to New Orleans. Once the Mississippi River was under Union control Texas would be isolated and could not give aid to the east. The second splitting thrust started in Tennessee and drove to the coast of Georgia, thereby breaking off the resources and men of the Deep South from states farther north. This was termed the anaconda strategy after the boa constrictor snake because it squeezed the South into submission; however, except for the naval blockade this was anything but a strangulation strategy. This was an aggressive plan that required extensive offensive action.

General Scott’s strategy required extensive sets of armies and a large navy. Southern coastlines were long and peppered with small bays and harbors. A blockade of such a coastline required a substantial navy. The South gained an army and good military leadership upon secession as many excellent officers moved south to support their states. The strategy of General Winfield Scott recognized the need to conquer a map. To split the South into parts required at least two armies, both very large. The same applied to the naval blockade. The North had neither a large army nor navy, but it soon would have. The Federal navy expanded rapidly, and the blockade was one of the most important parts of winning the war. The blockade destroyed the South’s economy which was just as important as other strategic moves since it substantially weakened the ability of the South to fight. The other naval contribution was the riverboats that successfully bombarded the southern troops and forts in the west as the Union moved down the massive river systems into the South.[131]

Throughout the war Lincoln ran an efficient and focused government. Immediately seeing the strategic weakness of the South, Lincoln knew victory would be his if he just kept fighting. Even after disasters such as Fredericksburg, he knew losses the Union sustained could be replaced, but Southern losses could not. Lincoln also recognized the importance of the blockade. Lincoln threatened war when Great Britain neared the completion of two powerful commerce raiders for the South. England wisely refused delivery. Lincoln became a good military strategist, and decision makers in the Union government were clear on their goals from the moment the war began.[132] All Lincoln needed was a set of generals equal to his resolve to win. It took time to find them, but after he appointed Grant and Sherman to assault the South the war was won.

Strategy—the South

The South decided on the classic cordon defense strategy, wherein their armies protected invasion routes around the Confederate perimeter and awaited attacks from the North. This strategy is teeming with problems because the defender cannot quickly mass forces against the enemy. When the blow falls the defender is weak at the point of attack and must rally troops to stop the advance. The power of the North also enabled it to invade simultaneously from several directions requiring the South to spread its forces thin. When reading about Hitler’s Europe in WWII, we will see the Nazis faced the same problem and adopted the same solution—with the same results.

Early in the war, during the Peninsula Campaign by the Union, Stonewall Jackson attempted in vain to convince Robert E. Lee and Confederate President Jefferson Davis to invade the North. The Union Army of the Potomac was fighting east of Richmond, Virginia, leaving the way north lightly guarded. Jackson advocated an invasion driving for Baltimore, Maryland or Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, and destroying the rail lines and factories located in these regions. Such a strategy would also force the abandonment of the Richmond campaign. If this worked and resulted in an early southern victory, the South could remain intact. Only in this condition would the Confederacy have a chance of surviving as a nation. By waiting for the Union invasion it was bound to lose territory, thereby minimizing its chances of success even if it “won” the war.

With few exceptions the South fought the war with fewer men and on its own soil. It is also estimated as many as 300,000 white male southerners fought for the Union Army, and another 200,000 mostly southern blacks joined the Union as well. A loss of nearly 500,000 men to the North was a telling blow to the South. If an infantry division in1860 was about 10,000 men, the defection equals the loss of between 30 to 50 divisions! Some northerners fought for the South, but the numbers are few and speculative.

As their economy fell apart, the southern armies were reduced to rags and very little food (fried corn was a staple). Northern determination to continue the war and its nearly unlimited supply of men and materials crushed the South. As long as the North held its determination and focused its power on achieving victory the South was doomed. Only if the North quit could the war end with a southern victory; however, if we examine this “victory by the South” scenario we might notice a few problems. Assume the North ran out of steam in 1863 after capturing New Orleans, Kentucky, Missouri, and a lot of Tennessee. The remaining South would be in extremely poor shape, and the North would never give back the area it bled to win. The results of such a “victory” are impossible to discern, nevertheless, with its lack of resources, damaged economy, and weak central government the smart money would bet on a quick economic and political failure followed by a request to re-enter the Union.[133] The Confederate states were small in number and resources, hence, a “victory” that lost large tracts of territory to the Union guaranteed the non-viability of the remaining states. Why the South fought on after 1863 and the loss of the Mississippi River is a mystery; although, most pin it on pride (I pin it on stupidity).[134]

The South’s political leadership and its governmental system started disjointed and uncoordinated, and then never changed. Many southern state governments held back men and resources to protect their own state, and constantly argued with their central government about recruitment and supplies as the war went on. As a result, the Confederacy failed to maintain its economy, muster troops, or feed and clothe its troops. In a very short time the roads, railroads, economy, and small industrial base were in shambles. The Union blockade stopped the export of cotton and tobacco devastating the Confederate economy. The southern nation only maintained itself through the superhuman exertions of its excellent armies. The Confederate troops held on through hell itself and then some. How these men kept fighting with such astounding bravery and endurance while starving and freezing is remarkable. It is clear from the economic situation of the Confederacy they had lost the war economically before the Battle of Antietam in September of 1862. Yet they fought on, winning victory after victory; nevertheless, the end was not in doubt as long as the Union kept fighting. Lincoln recognized this fact from the first.

Figure 37 Principle Campaigns of the Civil War—
1: Split the South down the Mississippi,
2: Split the South across Georgia,
3: Defeat Lee in Virginia,
4: Maintain a tight naval blockade

The War Begins

There are so many excellent books on the Civil War and its battles there is no need to recount the battles here (a few of the best books are listed at the end of the section); however, a couple of campaigns will be covered along with my opinions on what was going on in the war.

From the outset, Lincoln was determined to keep the South in the Union. After Lincoln’s inaugural address, where he said slavery could continue to exist where it was then legal, Virginia voted to stay in the Union. The key Border States were Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina. Each of these Border States allowed slavery but did not want a war with the North. After the South fired on the Fort Sumter, a federal military post in Charleston Harbor in South Carolina, Lincoln used the event to call up troops to invade the South, thus making a tragic political blunder. He required each state to send men to put down the rebellion. Lincoln told Fort Sumter to fight, and he tried to resupply the fort, thereby guaranteeing the South would fire the first shots of the war. Then Lincoln used the fall of the fort as the reason to call up the troops. Thus, the South firing on Fort Sumter was not a surprise, and calling up troops was planned before the Confederates fired on the fort. All this makes it impossible to believe Lincoln tried to avoid the war. It is obvious he decided negations would serve no purpose, and went forward with a plan to start the war on his terms. Unfortunately, his moves pushed the states of Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina to join the Confederacy. Not smart. After the second wave of secession, Lincoln negotiated with Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and Delaware to keep them in the Union, and they stayed. At least he was a fast learner.

That was it; the Border States seceded because they refused to send their troops against the secessionist states, and because they thought the Federal Government was becoming an oppressor. These Border States, especially Virginia, were the key to maintaining a viable South. When the key Border States joined the secession the power of the rebellion grew dreadfully. After Virginia joined the Confederacy the capital of the rebellion moved to Richmond, Virginia, only a few miles from Washington DC. This small area between the two cities saw a Noah’s flood of blood spilled out between the two armies.

Figure 38 Ft Sumter Bombardment—1861

The first battle was at Bull Run in Virginia in July 1861. It was a Union defeat, and it gave General Jackson his famous name “Stonewall.” As southern troops were about to break during a Union assault on vital Confederate positions, a Confederate officer among them pointed to Jackson and his men saying, “There stands Jackson like a stone wall . . .” Responding gallantly, Confederate troops rallied and drove back the Union attackers. The blow to the Union at Bull Run was significant and led to a new general taking over with orders to get the Union Army of the Potomac ready to fight.

The new general, George McClellan, took over on July 26, 1861 and immediately set about creating a good army. In this he was a total success; however, being a good organizer and trainer of men does not make one a good battlefield general. McClellan decided to march on the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia, by coming down the peninsula to the east of the city. By coming from the Atlantic Ocean side he achieved surprise, and he outnumbered the Confederate troops significantly; nonetheless, George McClellan was a timid leader. He threw away his chance at an early capture of the Confederate capital via hesitation and fear. As the Union Army inched its way toward Richmond, General Joseph Johnson, commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, fell wounded. This wound changed history. General Robert E. Lee, arguably one of the best military commanders of all time,[135] replaced him. Lee soon put McClellan on the run causing the Union Army to retreat to the Washington DC area. Many Union generals were so dismayed by General McClellan’s conduct they called him a traitor. At one point General Lee was attacking the Union positions and gaining little except exorbitant casualties. Worse, the position abandoned to retreat to Washington, DC was the best defensive position of all. If McClellan had dug in and repelled several more Confederate assaults, he may have damaged Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia beyond repair. Instead, he fled. Lee had lost so many troops because he was trying desperately to completely destroy the Union army, but the terrain and his subordinates worked against his plans.

Even after several Confederate victories Lee worried about the situation. Following consultations with Jefferson Davis, Lee’s army planned to invade Maryland because the state’s many southern sympathizers might be persuaded to join the South if an army arrived to assist them. If Maryland joined the rebellion it would be a immense blow to the Union. Lee marched off to Maryland, however, one of Lee’s lieutenants lost the entire invasion plan which was soon found by Union forces under McClellan. Someone wrapped the plans in a bunch of cigars and promptly lost the cigars along with the plans. After the plans came to light, McClellan bragged he could crush Lee because under the attack plan Lee divided his already limited forces; therefore, if McClellan attacked a portion of Lee’s divided army with his entire Union army he could destroy it before other Confederate units could help. McClellan could then turn and destroy the reduced Rebel army before it retreated to Virginia. Given the larger size of the Union Army, the task should have been within easy reach of even the bungling McClellan; even so, McClellan outdid himself in his search for defeat. The lost plans led to the great battle at Antietam, where McClellan assaulted a portion of Lee’s army trapped with its back against the Potomac River.

Antietam and Emancipation

The great battle at Antietam (Sharpsburg) came to pass on September 17, 1862. As usual, McClellan squandered many chances to destroy Lee’s trapped army, or at least cause it irreparable harm. After many hours of fruitless frontal assaults against well established Confederate defensive positions the Union attack stalled. At the last moment Lee managed to recombine his divided army, defeat another Union attack, and retreat back from whence he came across the Potomac. McClellan remained frozen in position, thus allowing the battered men in grey to escape. Lincoln was livid and moved to find a new general. Meanwhile, a Maryland woman witnessed the southern troops passing by her home and in her diary wondered if these were the men who had defeated “ . . . our gleaming legions.” She described the southern soldiers as men in rags, no shoes, and so hungry their ribs were showing. She reported their battle standards were the only non-ragged thing about them. Anyone reading the diary would know the South had already lost in September of 1862.

In spite of the poor outcome at Antietam, Lincoln declared a Union victory and issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves held in the southern states still in rebellion. Note it did not free the slaves in states that were not in rebellion such as Kentucky and Maryland. The issue of what to do with these slaves remained until after the war.[136]

Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation as a political move to assure nations overseas, such as England and France, that the North was against slavery. This put the southern cause in a bad light overseas since England and Europe banned slavery years before and did not want to hint at any kind of support for the institution. Now the South could never convince any powerful European nation to sustain it in the war. Gaining European support was a key reason Lee invaded the North. Southern victories in the North might convince some European nations to recognize the Confederacy as a viable state; hence, gaining support for independence. By issuing this proclamation, Lincoln put a major political and strategic dent in southern hopes.

The Proclamation also helped the Union cause within the United States. It gave the Union something more to fight for, because “maintaining the Union” could not carry the weight of the war much longer. The body count required to maintain the Union was already too high for some. However, the proclamation changed the war aims of the Union. Now the federal forces were fighting to set men free and the South to enslave men. This allowed the Union to withstand much higher casualties and keep fighting. In this Emancipation Proclamation stratagem, Lincoln showed himself to be a masterful politician achieving several significant goals at one stroke.

In the west, Union forces were attacking down the Mississippi River, and the Union Navy seized New Orleans cutting off a major supply route for the South. Ulysses S. Grant, placed in charge of the Western Theater of War, took the vital Mississippi River link ofVicksburg on July 4, 1863 in what was probably Grant’s best campaign. Now the Mississippi River was totally Union, and Texas, Arkansas, and nearly all of Louisiana were cut off from the rest of the South. The Union blockade was stopping all supplies flowing to the Confederate states from overseas. The South was finished, but its leaders demanded it fight on, ignoring the fact there was nothing left to win.

Gettysburg

The day before the capture of Vicksburg the Battle of Gettysburg ended in the north. Gettysburg’s took place from July 1 to July 3, 1863, and the cost in men and material was enormous. The South lost twenty-eight thousand men (28,000) in the confrontation and the North twenty-threethousand (23,000). The North could afford to lose men at this rate, but not the South. Those twenty-eight thousand southerners were veterans of many battles and impossible to replace.

Gettysburg represents General Robert E. Lee’s second and last invasion of the North, and perhaps the last chance for victory by the battered South. Lee’s men were starving. The entire South was starving, and supplies of clothing, shoes, blankets, food, and other essentials (except gunpowder and bullets) were very low. By invading the North in July, he could forage off Union land rich with crops. In addition, he might be able to draw the Union Army of the Potomac into a decisive battle. Lee realized an overwhelming victory was necessary, one totally overthrowing the Army of the Potomac. Perhaps such a victory would gain foreign support and a peace deal from the Union. If he failed, the South faced grounding down like corn in a mill. After full considerations of the options, the invasion seemed the only reasonable course of action. By just waiting, the Union would come after them again; and Lee’s men and horses would have less food than before. By moving north Lee’s army could at least eat.

Figure 39 Gettysburg,—Pickett’s Charge—arrow labeled 3

Gettysburg was what military men call a meeting engagement; that is, an unplanned encounter where two armies just run into one another. This was the worst kind of battle for the Confederates to fight. Lee faced a much larger army led by George Meade, who was cautious but determined. If nothing else, Meade knew good defensive ground when he saw it, and by taking up positions on Cemetery Ridge and Big and Little Round top he established an impressive defensive situation. At nearly any point before General Pickett’s famous charge Lee could have disengaged and looked for another battlefield. Lee needed to plan what to do before the engagement rather than making quick decisions during the engagement. Lee, however, decided to fight at Gettysburg. Why is not clear.

After a series of poor performances by his junior commanders on the flanks of the Union lines, he made a disastrous decision to attack the center of the enemy line on the high ground at Cemetery Ridge. Robert E. Lee had observed the results of mass assaults on prepared positions throughout the war. This decision to assault a dug in position on high ground defies comprehension.

Lee seldom made mediocre decisions.[137] Now he made a move that put an end to any hope of the northern invasion working at any level. The battle had been going on for two days when Lee looked to the high ground at the Union center as the place to strike. Not only that, his artillery was short of ammunition and federal cannons were in place opposite him that enjoyed a range and accuracy advantage.[138] Lee was therefore attacking a prepared position covered with artillery. The commander of Lee’s artillery told him he could not quiet the federal guns on the ridge before Pickett’s assault. One of Lee’s senior commanders (Longstreet) objected to the idea from the start, nevertheless, in his most injudicious move of the war, Lee ordered Pickett’s Charge.[139]

Pickett’s men were a tough bunch. Through accurate rifle fire, grapeshot, and cannon shells pouring in on them from Union positions Pickett’s hardened veterans kept going. Somehow, they reached the ridge top achieving a small breakthrough, but Union reinforcements put an end to that and drove Pickett’s remnant down the ridge. After the failed attack, Lee feared a Union counterattack that might destroy his army. However, the cautious Meade remained cautious, and once more General Robert E. Lee escaped to continue the war. Meade’s caution allowed Lee’s escape, but it was that same caution that won the greatest battle to ever take place on American soil. Lincoln’s ire was up once more as he learned of Lee’s escape. He knew he still needed a fighting general, all the same, fate was turning his way.

Grant and Sherman Destroy the South

General Ulysses S. Grant had been winning battles in the west for years. From Shiloh to Chattanooga he was unbeaten, and he was aggressive. Lincoln had found his fighting general. On March 12, 1864 Lincoln appointed General U S Grant general of the entire Union army, and Grant immediately appointed General William Tecumseh Sherman to command the west. Together they would form an unstoppable juggernaut devastating the South. Grant decided on coordinated assaults; thus, as he started toward Richmond, Sherman started toward Atlanta. Grant began his advance in May of 1864. Now called the Overland Campaign, Grant was grabbing Robert E. Lee by the lapels and never letting go. Grant was determined to pummel Lee until his army was destroyed. US Grant was smart enough to know he could not outmaneuver Lee; nevertheless, his men could fight as well as the southerners, and Grant had a lot more of them. Grant knew he would take large casualties, but he never imagined how large they would be as he battered his way toward Richmond.

Grant

Grant first challenged Lee in the Battle of the Wilderness, but when victory proved elusive he pulled out of the forested area and then turned south toward Richmond. In fact, Lee had won a significant victory, but Grant refused to be beaten. This was a telling move. When the Army of the Potomac lost to the Army of Northern Virginia in previous campaigns the Union generals turned the troops back to Washington DC to lick their wounds and prepare for another try months down the line. Not so this time. When Grant ordered the troops to continue south a cheer went up. The troops (and Lincoln) knew what was necessary all along, now they had the man who would do it.

Lee perceived Grant was moving toward Richmond rather than retreating (proof of an excellent general), so he pulled out of his positions in the Wilderness and got ahead of Grant’s army to block him at Spotsylvania where Grant’s men again failed to break the southern line. Nevertheless, Grant did not stop. He ordered another flanking movement toward Richmond, and Lee to pulled out to meet the Union movement once more. This pattern continued as Grant moved south consistently. Lee’s army never broke, but Grant never quit. At Cold Harbor, Grant made the classic error of attacking a well-prepared fixed position across open ground, and the results were bloodcurdling. Grant ordered the attack hoping to catch the Rebels before they could prepare their defenses. In eightminutes the Union lost 8,000 men—one thousand per minute! Grant swiftly ended the assault. Still, Grant did not stop. The Union casualties were piling up, but Grant moved ever forward to Richmond.

Figure 40 Grant’s Overland Campaign

In the course of seven weeks, Grant lost sixty-five thousand men.[140] As Grant moved to the east and south of Richmond to Petersburg, Lee’s men dug in, and the two armies became locked in trench warfare for nine months in a bloody and terrible prelude to World War I. The main difference between this trench warfare and World War I was equipment, such as the lack of machine guns, heavy howitzers, sophisticated artillery shells, and quick-firing bolt-action rifles. Even under conditions where the defense was muzzle-loaded rifles and cannons, the Union could not break through because of the intense defensive fire.

Think how much harder it would be against machine guns and modern rifles. The American Civil War was the first modern war, but the Europeans avoided studying the American Civil War calling it a fight between two armed mobs. The world missed what was going on. This was modern war,and it would only get worse.

A lesser president may have given up after seeing the casualties and the stalemate; however, Lincoln never faltered. Winning the war was all.

With Lee’s men in trenches to the front, Grant decided to extend his trenches causing the Confederates to do the same to protect their flanks. However, Grant was not flanking Lee, he was trying to thin out the Confederate line by making them cover additional ground. It worked, and in a surprise attack at Five Forks on April 1, 1864, the Confederate line broke. Grant’s men flooded into Richmond, raising the stars and stripes over the Confederate capitol.

Sherman

To the west, as Grant began the Overland Campaign, Sherman started his attack to reach Atlanta, Georgia, and then the sea. No southern army could stop Sherman. General Joseph Johnson commanded the Army of Tennessee and, conservative by nature, he avoided risking the loss of too many men in action. If Sherman were to destroy his army the South had nothing left. General Johnson attempted to force Sherman to attack prepared defenses, but Sherman avoided such attacks. Knowing assaults on prepared defenses was suicide, Sherman kept finding ways to circumvent Johnson’s defensive lines forcing the Rebels back toward Atlanta. In one instance, Sherman almost got a blocking force positioned to trap Johnson’s entire army, but a subordinate moved to an inappropriate location losing the chance to destroy the Army of Tennessee. Time after time, Sherman consistently forced Confederate retreats out of well prepared defensive lines, thereby winning battles without heavy fighting. Sherman’s campaign to win Atlanta was brilliant in all respects as he accomplished the goal of the campaign with few Union losses. No other civil war general did as much with so few losses, with the possible exception of Bedford Forrest, the commander of various Confederate cavalry units.

Figure 41 Sherman Takes Atlanta—1864

By conserving his men, Johnson at least put Sherman at constant risk. The Army of Tennessee was a tough veteran unit not to be underestimated. Johnson’s strategy infuriated the political leaders of the South who demanded an all out assault to defeat Sherman.[141] Johnson dared not take such a risk so they replaced him with General John Bell Hood. Hood was reckless—at times to the extreme. He was a poor choice to lead the Army of Tennessee, the last army between Sherman and the deep south. Hood assumed command as Sherman’s forces moved on Atlanta, Georgia.

At the Battle of Atlanta on July 20, 1864, Hood attacked Sherman’s army. He set up a plan to roll up Sherman’s flank and deliver a blow to his rear-supply areas. By attacking Sherman’s supply line Hood hoped to damage the Union army’s logistic situation enough to stop the advance. At least focusing on logistics was the correct strategy. The Confederates needed to get at the Union’s supply and communication line (there was only one rail line) and block it to stop the advance.[142] Johnson missed his chance to accomplish the same thing earlier in the campaign. In the event, Hood miscalculated the time and distances involved, and Union troops held on to vital areas, destroying the Confederate plan. Hood lost a large number of men and achieved nothing.

After a series of excellent moves to confound Hood and cut his supply lines, Sherman took Atlanta on September 2, 1864, thereby sealing a military victory and an electoral victory. Seizing Atlanta virtually guaranteed Lincoln’s re-election to a second term. For unclear reasons, the city of Atlanta burned to the ground. Perhaps the fire was started by Hood’s retreating army blowing up stores or by Sherman’s army deciding to torch it, no one really knows. The results were clear; Atlanta all but ceased to exist. Sherman took Atlanta’s population south by train and then made them debark for the countryside. In doing this, Sherman released thousands of starving, homeless southerners onto their neighbors who could ill afford to take care of them.

After the fall of Atlanta, Hood’s army mustered thirty thousand troops to oppose Sherman’s eighty thousand plus men, so Hood decided to march north toward Nashville and the Union’s railroad and supply centers at that location. Hood’s attack came to naught, except for the complete destruction of his army, thereby allowing Sherman a free hand for the rest of his campaign. For the rest of his operation, Sherman’s army faced little to no organized southern opposition. Sherman marched from Atlanta to Savannah, Georgia, and burned and destroyed everything along the way.[143] By the time Sherman reached the Atlantic Coast at Savannah his reputation as a destroyer of life and property was well secured. Sherman’s aim was to completely demolish the economy of the South and thereby end the war as soon as possible. “War is hell,” he would famously say, and few in Georgia would argue the point. After Savannah was reached, Sherman turned north to ravage South Carolina and trap Lee between his army and Grant’s.

Even after the fall of Richmond, the burning of Atlanta, the devastation of Georgia, and the annihilation of their every army, the southern political leaders tried to fight on. They thought by reaching Texas the rebellion might survive under their continued encouragement. Lee saw no way out. As the Union army was pursuing his army from Richmond, he stopped at Appomattox Court House and requested an audience with General US Grant. It was there Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia on April 9,1865. Other ragged, starving Confederate armies surrendered soon thereafter, and the political leaders of the South fell into captivity before they got very far (some dressed as women). Lee showed himself to be the consummate American when he ordered his army home. He could have told his army to fight on in guerrilla style in the hills and mountains of the land, but he did not, even though many counseled him to do so. Lee decided it should be totally over. An extended guerrilla war, deepening the burning hatred of each side, might destroy what was left of the nation. Certainly, the North’s response to such southern actions could have been repressive in the extreme.

Lincoln was prepared to admit the South back into the Union without punishment. During the war the Union’s war aims expanded as the number of dead alone demanded more than just saving the Union. The Union agenda soon included abolishing slavery as a key war aim. President Lincoln was shot dead by John Wilkes Booth on April 15, 1865, just a few days after Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House. His death removed the main obstacle to the Radical Republican agenda of punishing the South for its rebellion. At this point, a surprising split developed between the new president, Andrew Johnson, and Congress. President Andrew Johnson was a Democratic senator from Tennessee when that state seceded from the Union; however, Johnson stayed on in the Senate, as he was pro-Union. The other southern senators resigned as their states joined the rebellion. Lincoln chose Johnson as a running mate to widen the appeal of the Lincoln ticket to pro-Union Democrats. The Radical Republicans had decided the ideology fomenting the war was to be crushed out of the South. President Johnson tried to put Lincoln’s ideas into action, but this entailed opposing the Radical Republicans in Congress who believed they alone possessed the legal right to structure and run the Reconstruction of the South. Johnson, as Lincoln before him, thought Southern Reconstruction flowed from the executive branch as part of the war powers. Incensed by Johnson’s opposition, the House of Representatives impeached him, and failed by only one vote to remove him from office. Nonetheless, the Radicals marginalized President Johnson by enacting their program of southern “reform” over his objections.

Reconstruction of the South

1865 to 1877

Funny Name, Bad Results? What’d you mean you can’t tell?

The war of shot and shell had ended, but the war of words and legislation, ideas and ideologies, continued. The period of Reconstruction was a legislative and cultural war that went on for twelve years, or more, and cleaved profound divides into the “restored” Union. This is one of the most controversial periods in US history, as some view the era as one of great social experimentation with significant successes, and others think it was an outright occupation of American territory and the denial of Constitutional rights to ex-Confederates. If a better peace is the purpose of war (remember Scipio at Carthage?), then the North certainly failed to achieve the objective. Certain events, such as the destruction of the agriculturally rich Shenandoah Valley, Sherman’s devastating march to the sea, the Union blockade starving women and children in the South, and other northern war activities, although no doubt shortening the war, caused southerners to believe the North treated them as savages. Southerners thought they fought against oppression, but the Union treated them all like slave holders. The hatred engendered by the war failed to dissolve. Reconstruction fell far short of helping the traumatized nation recover, as once again the South bowed to overwhelming northern force.

The Radical Republicans under their leaders Representative Thaddeus Stevens and Senator Charles Sumner, considered the South conquered territory and totally under federal control. In addition, they thought Congress controlled Reconstruction issues, not the president. Issues such as who should be allowed to vote (ex-Confederates, blacks, etc.), how the rebel states should be allowed back into the Union, how the residents should be taxed, whether blacks should be allowed to hold public office, and many others were decided along ideological lines drawn hard between the radicals and the moderates in Congress. In the election of 1866, Radical Republicans gained enough congressional seats to override presidential vetoes; thus, the South was controlled by Radical Republicans in Congress, the Carpetbaggers,[144] Freedmen (free blacks), and US Army. Congress decided that readmission to the Union required a state’s voters to swear allegiance to the US Constitution and ratify recent Constitutional amendments, among several other actions. Northern states, logically concerned about the old southern leadership resuming its role and putting former slaves into economic bondage in place of legal bondage, began searching for ways to keep the Negros free and the old south suppressed. Former southern slave owners must not be allowed to resume their pre-war society. Congress, under Republican radical leadership, passed civil rights acts guaranteeing blacks the right to vote and preventing actions to restrict that right. Congress also passed numerous government service laws requiring southern states to provide education and care for orphans and the insane among other social endeavors long available only in the North.[145]

Southerners thought the Union was destroying their culture and taking away their constitutional rights. Even after their loss, southerners were proud of their “cause” and still believed they were right to leave the Union. Union actions proved to most southerners that oppression was the ultimate northern goal. Some southerners fought back violently in the form of mystic groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, but most just wanted to get back to work and restore their economy. Union troops stationed in the South were an occupying army for more than a decade as southern states gradually regained admission to the Union. The last state to regain statehood was Georgia in 1870.

An economic downturn called the Panic of 1873 caused the Republican Party to lose seats in the House and Senate reducing the Radical Republican’s strength. Political events in 1876 finally ended Reconstruction. In the presidential election of 1876 a dispute arose over who won, Rutherford Hayes (R) or Samuel Tilden (D). Tilden, the Democrat, won the popular vote, but because of a third party candidate neither Hays nor Tilden gained enough electoral votes to win the presidency; however, the Democrat needed only one electoral vote to take the presidency. This deadlock threw the election into the Congress. What happened is a mystery; however, most say a deal ended the deadlock, and Republican Rutherford B. Hays became president after winning all the disputed electoral votes. The deal seemed to be that Union troops would leave the South. The Union troops marched out in 1877. Soon thereafter the white southern culture rebounded, finding ways to limit black voting by restrictions not openly based on race. The methods successfully ended black suffrage in the South for about 100 years.

The Reconstruction era added three Constitutional Amendments: the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery; the Fourteenth Amendment gave citizenship to all persons born in the United States or naturalized and established civil rights for all citizens; theFifteenth Amendment secured the right to vote no matter what a person’s race, color, or previous condition of servitude. These amendments did not pass easily, and their provisions raise serious questions today because the southern states, not yet back in the Union, did not vote on the Amendments. Please note that theFifteenth Amendment failed to give women the right to vote. Odd as it may seem, men of all races would have the right to vote but no woman could vote.[146]

As President Grant assumed his second term scandals and corruption were rife. Newspapers found immense corruption in the Federal government and the Reconstruction governments in the South causing Republicans to lose political power. With western farmers asking for cheap money (greenbacks—paper money not backed by gold or silver) and no tariffs, and the eastern businesses battling for tight money (money backed by gold or silver) and high tariffs, the Republicans lost voters in the west. As the South came back into the Union all the previously Confederate states voted universally for Democrats; thus, Republicans started losing governorships, senatorial seats, and soon would lose the House of Representatives altogether. As the blacks came under increasing pressure in the South, Republicans balked at responding fearing the loss of even more political power. When the Republican Party restrained its Congressional actions the states stepped in and started handling previously federal issues as local matters. The South refused to obey Federal laws on voting, and eventually the Supreme Court struck down the Reconstruction civil rights laws Republicans had pushed through during Reconstruction.

The Civil War era had ended at last, or so it seemed in 1877. However, it had not. In the 1960s, under the leadership of Martin Luther King and others, blacks in the South again attempted to gain the civil and voting rights enjoyed by white citizens of the United States. The civil rights movement once again caused the North to attack the South, only this time legislatively through its majorities in Congress. Northern institutions began to pound southern culture using the federal courts and federal law enforcement. Northern newspapers and TV reporters characterized southerners as Neolithic in customs and culture; therefore, the South fully deserved harsh punitive measures for their treatment of blacks. This propaganda was like that used by the abolitionists in 1860 to stir emotions in the North against the South. It worked in 1860, and it worked in 1960. Eventually, large numbers of laws passed giving additional protection to minorities. The power of the courts would grow immensely during this legislative, legal, and media onslaught against southerners.

In 1960, Southern States subtlety and openly discriminated against blacks. During the WWI era, President Woodrow Wilson’s Administration ignored discriminatory laws passed in the South. Over time these Jim Crow laws became more separatist in nature. The US Supreme Court upheld this societal and legal separatism declaring “separate but equal” was Constitutional. In fact, the facilities were unequal. Many white southerners disliked these laws; however, nothing changed until black activists began to demonstrate, risking arrest for defying discriminatory statutes. Once the nation became aware of the plight of the southern blacks millions rallied to their cause. In Congress, especially the US Senate, the South held powerful committee chairmanships and were the senior members of the ruling Democratic party in 1965. The southern Congressmen voted as a block, so the remaining northern Democrats could not gain a majority on discrimination issues. Only by joining with the Republican Party could northern Democrats overcome the southerners voting power. Over the objections and obstructions of southern Congressmen, Congress pushed through civil rights legislation to protect minorities. The president, Texas southerner and liberal Lyndon B. Johnson, signed these bills into law. It was perhaps Johnson’s greatest achievement.

The press, especially the electronic media (TV, radio), played a major role in bringing the nation’s attention to the quandary of the blacks. The press, however, went overboard in condemning southern culture and laws. Not every southern white in 1960 supported discrimination; however, the northern press painted the South with a broad brush making it sound as if every white southerner was racist by birth.

What occurred as a result of this pressure was a change in the law for the better, but it also resulted in a tremendous growth of power in the federal governments—especially the Federal Courts, and the US Supreme Court. By using racial discrimination as its platform federal courts expanded their power to rule exponentially. For example, courts forced busing on local jurisdictions causing local governments to expend large amounts of money by order of the court. In effect, the courts were telling legislatures how to spend money when the US Constitution, and all state constitutions, clearly set forth only the House of Representatives, or its state equivalent, has the power and legal right to spend money. The courts took on the role of unelected legislators not subject to any oversight by the people. When the US Supreme Court held state legislatures must be based on population alone, it was a direct blow at the peoples’ right to choose how they were governed. The courts interfered with law enforcement, schools, local employment, and other facets of local governance and private life. Courts added to the powers of the federal government and truncated the powers of state governments immensely as a direct result of the crusade against racism. Many commentators opined race was a ruse to increase central government power, including the power of the federal courts; and, in fact, much less intervention was necessary to solve the legal and cultural problems of racism.

Aftermath—the Impacts of the Civil War

The greatest impact of the Civil War was the saving of the Union. The second greatest impact was the considerable growth in power of the federal government. The power of the presidency grew enormously, as did the powers of Congress. By extension, the power of the states significantly decreased. Today, few think anything about federal government involvement in local schools, local government, prescription drugs, medical care, vehicle safety, and on and on. Before the Civil War this would have been an outrage. Today, the federal government directly takes huge amounts of people’s salaried earnings—considerably more than the local government takes; however, before the Civil War the federal government did not tax individuals directly, and it controlled far less money than the states. After the Civil War everything changed. Another enormous change was in the economy. The Civil War expanded the industrial economy of the North and helped to make the United States a world power of industrial production.

Let Us Learn

What can the Civil War have to say to us? How about moderation and understanding are all important in human relations, and impatience leads to trouble. The South went off half cocked and destroyed themselves. The Union sought to pressure people harshly, and almost destroyed themselves. Keep cool, be ready to bargain, know the other side, understand what they hold dear, and realize that half a loaf is better than none.

Another important historical lesson involves learning where things are going, and adjusting to the direction. After 1862, and the loss at Antietam, the South needed to get real and just settle with the Union. At that point Lincoln might have accepted a deal freeing the slaves and in return give the South monetary help to rebuild their shattered economy. This deal would leave the South unoccupied, its economy still half-way intact, and could reduce the punishment the Radicals were ready to bestow. Learn to cut your losses. If things are going bad, get out. Take the hit and keep the ability to control your destiny to some extent. With the war going against them, but still not real badly, the South kept fighting. Don’t do that. Life is not a football game where there is always next season. Life often hands us situation in which there really is no tomorrow. The best time for the South to approach the Union for a settlement was after a significant Southern victory like Chancellorsville (April 30, 1863). With a proper calculation of where the war was going the South could have chosen a good moment to approach Lincoln, thus bettering its chances of getting a decent deal. However, even if the deal was unconditional surrender the South should have taken it early on. Cut your losses, take what you can salvage, and build up for the next project. That is how to survive and prosper.

Books and Resources:

Great Books on the American Civil War (There are hundreds of books on the Civil War; a few are great, and a few of the great ones are listed below).

Bruce Catton: his writings include many wonderful books on the Civil War (Mr. Lincoln’s Army, Glory Road, A Stillness at Appomattox, The Coming Fury, The Terrible Swift Sword, Never Call Retreat, Grant Moves South, Grant Takes Command, and others).

James M. McPherson: The Battle Cry of Freedom (my favorite one-volume work on the Civil War), Ordeal by Fire: the Civil War and Reconstruction. I highly recommend The Battle Cry of Freedom.

Shelby Foote: The American Civil War, a Narrative History. Excellent set of books.

A Battlefield Atlas of the Civil War, Symonds, the Nautical and Aviation Publishing Company, 1994.

The American Civil War (West Point Military History Series), Editor T. Griess, Square One Publishing, 2002. The West Point publications are always superb.

The Stakes of Power 1845-1877, Nichols, and Berwanger, Hill and Wang, 1982

From the Civil War to 1900

Industrial Expansion

From the end of the Civil War until 1900 was a period of relative peace and prosperity in the United States.[147] The power of America’s industrial base continued to grow. During this time Rockefeller, Carnegie, and other industrialists consolidated economic might into monopolies or trusts; and financial wizards like J.P. Morgan built financial empires spanning the globe. To demonstrate the power of these men we note that J. P. Morgan bailed out the US Treasury after the financial panic of 1893-1895 when a gold drain threatened the nation’s money value. Think about that for a moment, one man possessed the financial power to save the US Treasury. In 1869, the transcontinental railroad linked the US east to west with the driving of the golden spike in Utah, and the Panama Canal opened, linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through the small isthmus connecting North and South America. This canal was vital to US military and economic interests because it allowed linking the East and West Coasts of the United States by sea, avoiding the extremely long sea route around Cape Horn at the tip of South America. In 1876, Alexander Graham Bellinvented the telephone and revolutionized communication.

Other occurrences were starting to influence the nation. Western farmers since the end of the Civil War were under great economic pressure because of the government’s refusal to sponsor cheap money; that is, go off the gold standard and print money thereby causing inflation. To overcome some of the problems of the era farmers formed the Grange, an organization helping farmers modernize farming methods, and increasing their political power. The Democrats soon learned to harness the votes of these folks by appealing to their special needs. In the industrial areas of the nation workers began forming unions. One of the first large unions, the National Labor Union, had a real influence on the election of 1872. The membership and power of these early labor unions grew until the Panic of 1873, after which the number of unemployed swelled substantially; thus, shrinking union power. Nonetheless, the power of reform movements to stop government corruption, and help the workers and farmers, advanced during the late 1800s. The resurgent Democrats were the main beneficiaries of these movements. Liberal Republicans wanted similar reforms but failed to gain control of their party. This philosophical split reduced the power of the Republican party.

The Panic of 1873 was severe. In 1866 and 1870, Europe suffered through two wars of limited extent; still, these wars brought on recessions and numerous European business failures. Europeans sold their American securities driving down the price, and reducing their value as collateral held on loans. This in turn affected American banks holding these securities as collateral making their financial positions weaker (for more information on depressions and the accompanying financial mumbo jumbo see our discussion of the Great Depression). In the USA there was no central bank, leading to an inability to transfer funds from bank to bank. For example, a bank failing in Kansas would need money to stay open; however, it would have a hard time getting additional funds from New York banks that held all the cash. Worse, if the New York banks began to fail they could literally make it impossible to for other banks to get money (capital) to continue business operations (remember, they held almost all the money), leading to a chain of failures.

Then the next blow fell. The railroads needed money because shipping was down and the investment houses put money into them thus draining the New York banks of their financial reserves (now no bank had money). When major bank drafts (checks) began showing up New York banks held no money to meet the demand—so they shut their doors (wow, sounds like 1929, 2008 etc). Of course, this caused a wave of bank failures followed by businesses bankruptcies. Between 1873 and 1878, business failures went from 500 per year to 10,000 per year, and about 40 percent of the nation’s factory workers lost their jobs. The price farmers received for their products fell dramatically. This caused a demand for relief, mainly through cheap money polices, such as the unlimited coinage of silver. Farmers, among others, wanted inflation. Inflation would allow the sale of crops for more than they paid to grow them. Tight money policies forced farmers to sell crops at about the same price it cost to grow them, leaving farmers no profit. As tight money policies continued states passed legislation bringing some railroad cheats under control.[148] At least the legislation against railroad discrimination provided the farmers some relief from overly expensive transportation costs.

The Panic of 1873 did not end until 1879, and unemployment hit 14 percent by 1876. The economic problems led to railroad strikes and violence when President R. B. Hayes called in Federal troops to end the strikes. All of this led to political problems for the Republicans. As a result of the long depression the Democrats won the House of Representatives in 1874. Similar events were taking place in Europe, but Europe recovered faster.

Much of the progress from 1864 to 1900 was wonderful for the common person. The average American (or European) gained the ability to travel from coast to coast, talk to friends over the telephone, and buy goods from all over the world. However, like all changes, it also brought undesirable results. The urban world brought urban squalor and intense poverty. It seems as people advance technologically they stayed the same emotionally and intellectually. Reformers arose and challenged society to fix these problems, but they were never fixed; however, it was not from lack of trying. Recall these reformers came forward and demanded society “do something” about the plight of the underclass during an age of progress when society thought any problem could be solved. Unfortunately, nothing any government tried since 1750 solved the problem of urban poverty and the disassociation from society caused by world modernization. The new, larger, and more powerful cities created new, larger, and relatively powerless groups of people struggling along on next to nothing while living hungry and often immoral lives. In turn, this group gave birth to children who fared no better, so the cycle of poverty, immorality, crime, drug use, filthy living conditions, and exploitation continued unabated.

The new cities were (and are) massive, and the problems of this struggling class are unsolvable (so far). Urban reformers always wailed for more money to give these careworn folks, but giving them money failed. Feeding and clothing them at public expense, and trying to train them for productive work, among other efforts, failed consistently. The problem with urban reforms, stopping drug addition, preventing alcohol abuse, limiting crime, feeding the poor, and helping the underprivileged, all turn on the one invariable of history—human nature. Reforms will fail as long as human nature remains the same. How can we know that? History tells us so. From ancient Rome to modern New York the results of these programs are always the same, total failure. Why? Because human nature stays the same. For unknown reasons, human nature does not allow anything, including better living conditions, extra money, gifts, training, or education, to change its basic character. Criminals stay criminals, prostitutes stay prostitutes, lazy folks remain lazy; thus, all the reforms tried by all the societies that ever existed failed to change these facts. Somehow, this lesson of history remains unlearned. New theories of social reform, new psychology, and new government programs consistently came forth with ever increasing financial demands on the average person to pay up and pull these people out of poverty and squalor. However, nothing ever worked. Rome, Great Britain, America, and an endless parade of other societies tried numerous solutions; still, the urban underclass and their problems remained.

It seems strange to mention that as all this urbanization and modernization was going on one Colonel George Armstrong Custer, along with 265 of his men, underwent a butchering by Sioux warriors at the Little Bighorn River in 1876. This displays the many contrasts on the American scene. “Wild Indians” were attacking cavalry units in the west while people were planning to string telephone lines over paved city streets in the East.

In 1850, most Americans wanted to stay out of world affairs. The same was true in 1900 because the nation was fundamentally isolationist. However, powerful men wanted the United States in the world arena, and to that end they would build up the American military and project the nation onto the world stage. In 1885, Josiah Strong published Our Country, which argued for American Imperialism. How could a nation that rebelled against British Imperialism now want to embrace the very thing it fought so hard to jettison? Under Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt the US Navy expanded and modernized its fleet. It seems politicians always want more power both at home and on the world scene. So it was that in 1898, Cuba became the center of US attention, mostly through US newspapers demanding war with Spain.

America Becomes an Imperial Power—1898

On February 15, 1898, an explosion aboard the USS Maine anchored in Cuba’s Havana Harbor sunk the ship, killing and injuring many men. An ammunition accident in the battleship’s forward main battery probably caused the enormous explosion.[149] American newsmen, blaming the Spanish government for placing a mine, shrieked for war against Spain. Much to the joy of the Hurst newspaper chain Spain’s diplomatic overtures fell on deaf ears. The United States declared war on April 21, 1898. The Spanish-AmericanWar was a short, sharp conflict where the US Navy under Commodore George Dewey managed to defeat the Spanish fleet at Manila Bay in the Philippines on May 1, 1898, and the US Army defeated the Spanish in a series of battles in Cuba centered on the city of Santiago. Theodore Roosevelt was in Cuba leading the charge of the Rough Riders (who were foot soldiers) up the critical position of San Juan Hill. After several battles the Spanish defenders of Cuba surrendered at Santiago on July 17, 1898. Defeats in Cuba and the Philippines convinced Spain to throw in the towel. The Americans acquired significant Spanish possessions in the Caribbean and the Pacific. Thus, America became an imperial power gaining the Philippines, Cuba, Guam, Wake Island, and Puerto Rico from Spain. Cuba gained independence rather soon in comparison to the Philippines that remained a virtual colony for decades. The people in the Philippines did not like US imperial rule any better than Spanish imperial rule and revolted against the United States in 1899. This blood-spattered guerrilla insurrection went on for years, ending in 1902 with the United States declaring the Philippines unorganized territory whose people were not US citizens.

So now the United States fought rebellions in its imperial territory much like England in 1776. A weird circumstance brought about by leaders in the US Government, and the US news media, desiring world power for the United States. As such, they copied England, as Germany and the rest of Europe did, and created an overseas empire. The United States could not compete with the British, a major trading and financial partner, but some leaders in America wanted their share of the international spotlight; so, they created an empire, small as it was. As time marched on Cuba became a thorn in the side of the US Government for decades (after Castro), and the Philippines required an immense sum of money and lives to free it from Japan’s conquest in World War II. After WWII the US quickly got rid of its colonial “empire.” Overall, this imperial adventure proved costly in the extreme for the United States of America.

Copying Britain

Throughout the 1800s, nations desiring world power copied the greatest of world powers at the time, the United Kingdom, by seeking colonies and empires. It seems a bit odd trying to gain a world empire in 1900, because England, Holland, and France already controlled most of the world, so little remained for the Johnny-come-lately. Nations like Germany and the United States needed to follow a different path to greatness, but no one had any ideas on how else to do it. And, naturally, just as everyone began wanting an empire the Imperial Age became an anachronism, ending because colonies were hard to keep. Between putting money into them for development, other financial outlays became constant and necessary to protect the original investment. The overall costs were more than the benefits derived, but few noticed at the time. England’s imperial system created a preferred trade zone where exchanges within the British Empire were duty free. Britain protected the sea-lanes, built railroads to bring goods to market, and otherwise expended effort to gain more benefit from its colonies. To make this work Britain needed several colonies with a wide variety of raw materials and locally manufactured goods. Unless another nation could recreate this variety of resources and pour a lot of money into infrastructure development the payoff was not there for gaining colonies. The English put the infrastructure in place over many decades; thus, the funds were sunk costs, and maintenance alone could hold the infrastructure together. New nations on the colonial scene had a lot of expensive catching up to do, as the USA, Germany, Italy and others were to find out. Smart political leadership looks for new ways to achieve goals, but smart political leadership is a rare commodity; thus, new nations chased England and France to become world powers. Not smart. At least the US kept it small and did not get upset when more could not be acquired. Germany would react differently.

From 1800 to 1900, industrial and technological development around the world continued. Especially important was the development of electricity. From about 1800, when Alessandra Volta invented the battery, to 1886 when Nikola Tesla invented alternating current, the new phenomenon of electricity was showing what the future could look like. Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821 and this allowed the use of electricity for an ever-increasing number of applications. The invention of alternating current propelled the world forward into a new age of power some have termed the second industrial revolution. Tesla invented so many modern concepts he is called the Father of the Modern World. Some of his accomplishments include alternating current, the induction motor, the rotating magnetic field, wireless technology, and the US Supreme Court deemed Tesla the true inventor of the radio. In 1884 in Britain, Parson’s steam turbine was unveiled. In 1885, Daimler of Germany created the internal combustion engine.[150] In 1895, the first public cinema opened in France. In 1901, J.P. Morgan created US Steel, the first billion-dollar corporation. America cheered its first Rose Bowl game in 1902.[151] On December 17, 1903, the Wright brothers became the first to manage powered flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.[152] In 1908, Henry Ford opened the first assembly line for vehicles.

Figure 42 Tesla, father of the modern world

However, something patented in 1883 by Hiram Maxim would change the face of the world by blowing it off with great efficiency—the machine gun. The name itself tells the story, a gun of the machine age. It fired large amounts of ammunition automatically, that is, without a person reloading it one round at a time. By just pulling the trigger it fired until the ammunition ran out. The main financier of the factory needed to construct these guns was Vickers (an English firm), and they were constructed in large numbers by England in the late 1800s. Their use in colonial warfare was decisive, allowing advancing technology to keep the Europeans in control of their far-flung empires with fewer men. Their use in the Great War of 1914 to 1918 caused paralysis on the Western Front and millions of deaths.

The world is now at 1900, a watershed in history. The world changed dramatically since 1800. The twentieth century saw unmitigated change, social disorder, ideological upheaval, and endless butchery. It is to that story we now proceed.

Books and Resources

Dreadnought, Robert K. Massie, 1992, Ballantine Books. Massie reviews the entire era leading up to WWI in grand style. He gives fairly complete biographies on each major personage of the times from Cecil Rhodes to Queen Victoria.

Wizard:TheLifeandTimesofNikolaTesla:BiographyofaGenius, Marc Seifer, 2001, Citadel Press Books